Programmed classroom instruction

ABSTRACT

A computer-implemented method of overseeing and adjusting the instruction and evaluation of a student with respect to one or more topics of study within a classroom. The subject matter of an academic course is studied and broken down into a plurality of discretely defined behavioral performances designed to be readily and objectively recognized as being mastered or not by a student. One or more of the discretely defined behavioral performances are then selected, with the aid of a first computerized database system, as learning objectives for the week. At the end of the week, a student is subsequently evaluated on these objectives. Results of the evaluation are then transferred to a second computerized database system, which organizes the collected data into an interactive learning management report that can be configured by a reviewer in real time to display a variety of levels of detail.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This is a continuation-in-part of our co-pending application Ser. No.11/025,653, filed Dec. 29, 2004 (Atty. Docket No. FBR F-28), andentitled “PROGRAMMED CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION”.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention generally relates to a system of management ofeducation suitable with conventional classrooms and schools byadaptation of the teaching and learning process into a programmeddigital process compatible with advances in information technology. Morespecifically, the present invention describes an integrated set ofmethods and instruments useful for the continuous oversight andadjustment of the classroom educational process.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

In recent years, innovative practices in general education have begun toemphasize learning methods characterized by higher degrees ofspecificity. Course syllabi may be divided into dozens, even hundreds ofdetailed teaching/learning units. The influences fostering these effortsderive from several different sources. Personnel management planningsometimes attempts to spell out instructional responsibilities toteachers for the school year. Alternatively, efforts by academicdesigners have led to development of precise instructional sub routinessuch as programmed texts.

Though detailed teacher job assignments provide more careful expositionof performance expectations, there has been a universal failure toprovide adequate instruments and methods for tracking the more elaborateperformances expected. Alternatively, previous attempts to develop thetechnically advanced learning guidance and assessment systems such asprogrammed texts, have produced materials for individual student use butoffer no system of teacher support and guidance in normal classroomcircumstances.

The present method adapts and integrates features from these differentgenres to produce a unique multi part system of detailed managementinfluence and oversight suited to conventional classroom and schoolsettings.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

An integrated system and set of methods for the continuous oversight andadjustment of the classroom educational process. Included within thesystem and set of methods is 1) a particular system and method ofprecise fractionation of educational goals into discrete units bestsuited for learning. 2) A system and method for standardizing andorganizing the discrete learning units into teaching and learningprocedures. 3) A system and method for accurately observing andmeasuring and improving learning progress of these discrete learningunits. 4) A system and method for automatically analyzing and thenfrequently presenting to remotely located managers, a completedescription of the progress and current achievement levels of individualstudents, classroom groups, and entire schools. This system and set ofmethods in summary is termed—PROGRAMMED CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a partial list of “reading” learning units that are the resultof a process of fractionation of educational subject matter, that, whentaken as a whole, define the reading skills that, upon selection, becomethe teaching and learning objectives for reading for a first gradestudent.

FIG. 2 is a partial list of “science” learning units that are the resultof a process of fractionation of educational subject matter, that, whentaken as a whole, define science skills that, upon selection, become theteaching and learning objectives for science for a first grade student.

FIG. 3 is a partial list of “social studies” learning units that are theresult of a process of fractionation of educational subject matter,that, when taken as a whole, define the social studies skills that uponselection become the teaching and learning objectives for Social Studiesfor a first grade student.

FIG. 4 is an illustration of the WEEKLY PREVIEW portion of the presentinvention. Following teacher selection of learning units from thecomputer library (lesson plan), as teaching objectives for the followingweek, and installing any parent communications, the plan is printed asthe WEEKLY PREVIEW and distributed to all parents.

FIG. 5 is an illustration of the WEEKLY EVALUATION REPORT portion of thepresent invention. Following weekly observation, detection and computerentry of completed learning (mastery) of learning units, results areautomatically printed as this report and delivered to parents.

FIG. 6 is an illustration of the Classroom Teaching Chart portion of thepresent invention. Following selection of the weekly learningobjectives, the instructor may call up, and adjust, as learningprogresses, this display of current learning status for each child andfor the entire classroom, and for each selected learning objective.

FIG. 7 is an illustration of the QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT portion ofthe present invention, such as are distributed to parents.

FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of the serial order andgeneralization-specialization options of the data presentations of theLEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT of the present invention.

FIG. 9 is an illustration of the introductory panel of the LEARNINGMANAGEMENT REPORT of the present invention.

FIG. 10 is an illustration of the STUDENT LOG generated by the LEARNINGMANAGEMENT REPORT of the present invention.

FIG. 11 is an illustration of the STUDENT DIGEST generated by theLEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT of the present invention.

FIG. 12 is an illustration of the STUDENT/CLASS PERFORMANCE RANGESgenerated by the LEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT of the present invention.

FIG. 13 is an illustration of the CLASSROOM LOG generated by theLEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT of the present invention.

FIG. 14 is an illustration of the CLASSROOM DIGEST generated by theLEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION I. Defining the MeasurableComponents of Knowledge in Digital Format

The present invention begins by the establishment of a computer assistedmethod of designating precisely the exact components of knowledge andtheir organization which constitutes a desirable state of education andskill for a particular grade level and subject matter in generaleducation. The required analysis selects discrete, observable, behaviorswhich represent, when learned, complete knowledge elements and/orcombinations of elements. The process further organizes these knowledgeelements according to structural and functional groupings as well asconventional levels of advancement. The result of this definitionalprocess is the establishment of a large group of unique, individuallydescribed behaviors or learning units, which are so specific that ateacher can select any one as an explicit teaching objective and thendefinitively teach, and thereafter recognize the presence or absence ofthis behavior by a student.

This elaborate definitional process may be characterized as definingdesirable knowledge by its overt behavioral representation and thenfractionating these behaviors into a digitally compatible format.

The logical process of digitizing complex subject matter has beenbeneficially employed in numerous other scientific and technicaldisciplines with the intent of harnessing the greater power ofmeasurement systems that utilize discrete detection and management logicand apparatus for iteration and compilation. Traditionally many complexphenomena that were viewed as continuous and multi-dimensional, werethought to be subject only to analogical methods of measurement, i.e.sound, light, etc. However, by applying digital techniques offragmentation into multiple distinct units, sound, light, and now, evenacademic repertoire, become addressable by systems of precise detection,measurement, and in consequence, management.

In the present invention, therefore, prior to the initiation of anacademic course of study, the subject matter of the course is analyzedin detail and broken down into a plurality of discretely definedbehavioral performances suitable for “yes-no” recognition, which arethereafter established as teaching objectives. Once compiled, the largevolume of objectives are stored in a library of learning elementscategorized by general subject matter and estimated difficulty levelavailable for selection from a classroom guidance computer.

Three sets of learning elements (teaching objectives) are depicted intable format in FIGS. 1-3, respectively, for purposes of example. Thetable of FIG. 1 depicts some of the learning units available for choiceas reading objectives for a first-grade student. Similarly, the tablesof FIGS. 2 and 3, respectively, depict sample sets of learning unitsrelevant to the teaching and learning of science and social studies fora first-grade student.

II. Establishing Performance Measurement in a Digital Format

Traditional academic planning and grading systems employed by teachersuniversally treat educational subject matter as continuous repertoireand typically attempt precision by direct analogical measurements basedon multi-dimensional standards. Subsequently, teachers average thesemeasurements in some fashion and then give one summary grade for anentire subject of study. The use of digital procedures by the presentinvention improves upon the traditional systems and methods because eachexplicit and unique objective can be accurately identified, moreuniformly taught, and the resulting learning more accurately andconsistently detected and mathematically compiled by the instructor. Astudent's performance within the classroom can not only be trained andevaluated in a more objective manner, deficiencies of performance arealso more readily identified and isolated due to the high level ofdetail and clarity by which each objective is defined.

Consider the following example to illustrate the above point. A firstgrade student's reading ability is evaluated over the course of threeweeks. Under a traditional academic planning and grading system, thestudent earns a “B+” grade for the first week, a “B” grade for thesecond week, and an “A−” grade for the third week, resulting in acumulative “B+” grade for the three week period. Except for the obviousfact that the student has earned a respectable grade, no other detailconcerning the student's reading ability, including the areas in whichhe or she may still be deficient, can be determined by the abovetraditional system.

Alternatively, over the same three week period, a second student'sreading proficiency is evaluated by the present invention, on the basisof the 20 teaching objectives listed in the table of FIG. 1. At the endof the three weeks, the second student has demonstrated proficiency in17 of the 20, or roughly 85%, of the listed objectives. In addition tothe fact that the second student has achieved a respectable level ofproficiency over the three week period, it has also been determined thatthe second student is having problems identifying the consonant soundsd, m and s (Item Numbers RE3-1 and RE4-1) and identifying consonantsthat can sound alike (Item Number RE13-1), thereby precisely indicatingwhat supplementary teaching is necessary.

Because traditional academic planning and grading systems typicallyconsider academic subject matter to be a continuous datum and thereafterassess a student's performance as a matter of degree, reliance is madeupon scales and measurement along continua. One common example, asalready demonstrated in the example above, is the “A” through “F” lettergrading scale in which a student earns a grade of “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” or“F” depending on the student's evaluated proficiency in a topic.Frequently the number of levels or degrees in this grading scale isfurther expanded by assigning a “plus” or “minus” to most of the lettergrades, such as, for instance, a grade of “B+” or “C−”.

Unfortunately, these traditional grading schemes tend to be quitesubjective in their implementation. One instructor might assess acertain level of performance by a student as deserving a grade of “A−”,while a second instructor might evaluate the exact same level ofperformance as only deserving a grade of “B+”. Because these traditionalgrading schemes are inaccurate, it is difficult to compare theperformance level achieved by two or more students. Such ambiguitieshave also stymied any development of automatic performance measurementand analysis.

The academic planning and grading system of the present inventionconfirms learning performance relative to a learning unit standard asmastered or not, i.e., as a matter of kind rather than as a matter ofdegree. When a teacher selects certain knowledge units to be thelearning objectives of the current week, a state of “teaching andlearning has begun” is automatically established for each student andeach objective chosen in the gradebook section of the classroom guidancecomputer. Then at the end of the week, each student is evaluated by theteacher in reference to the week's learning objectives. A student isevaluated on the basis of either having mastered an objective or not(roughly equivalent to a traditional grade of A or A+). Consider, onceagain, the example of a first grade student being evaluated on the basisof the 20 objectives listed in the table of FIG. 1. If the studentdemonstrates completed learning of all but one of the listed objectives,he or she would earn 19 scores of “2” and one score of “1”.

Advantages in adopting a digital, all or nothing, definitional criterionand detection system include the ability to use a single quantitativemethod and common scales to express, examine, and compare not onlyvariations in performances within a single group or class of students,but also, variations in performances in different curricula anddifferent aged students, and in different instructional settings.

The scoring system of the present invention accurately recognizes thepotential ambiguity of “0” (zero)—as indicating either a lack of masterysubsequent to teaching, or, a lack of mastery prior to teaching. This isclarified by employing a three state system: —0— “Teaching not yetbegun”; —1— “Teaching and Learning have begun”, i.e. the week'sobjectives are chosen and the week of presentation is proceeding (butlearning is not complete); —2—, “teaching and learning are complete”. Bythis method, the separate performances of teacher and student arerecorded by “1's” and “2's”.

III. A Classroom Guidance System Designed for the Teaching of SubjectMatter Prepared in Digital Format

There are several inherent consequences of redesigning the extensive andcomplex subject matter of education into large numbers of discreteunits. One is to establish both the opportunity and the imperative fortime and labor saving methods. To this end, the application of moderndigital systems and personal computers for recording basic teaching andlearning information has already been covered. The lesson planning andgradebook components described above would, by themselves, be usefuland, indeed have been developed by others in various other forms asteacher aids. In the present invention, however, they are basiccomponents of an integrated system of educational management which takesaccount of, and is adapted to several prominent consequences of thedigital design of education.

Establishing numerous, simplified, learning units, leads teachers totake frequent, specific instructional and observable actions. Sincethese responses are accomplished on a classroom computer, softwaredesign affords the opportunity to provide guidance and measurement ofthe teaching and the learning process. The academic character, temporaldimensions, and coincidence with the past and current conditions of theclassroom setting relative to teacher and student performances will berecorded and, as a result, can be reviewed by the teacher and otherresponsible managers.

In the present method, as in many educational settings, one or moreteachers and teacher assistants are primarily responsible for theeducational progress of a classroom of 10 to 20 children of generallysimilar ages and academic backgrounds. Distinct from typical classroomshowever, the present method assumes one person designated as an on siteeducation manager. In the present invention, the teacher in charge is amember of a larger management team collectively responsible for andactively participating weekly in the educational events of theclassroom. These other managers participate remotely and maintainoversight with the managing teacher by computer linkage. The classroomcomputer may be described as the classroom guidance computer while otherdistant information stations are termed the remote management computers.

The academic management system of the present invention is thusimplemented through the use of two distinct computerized databasesystems. The first computerized database resides within a local,management programmed, classroom guidance computer. The secondcomputerized database is a remote system associated with a schooldistrict office or other school administrative body, which generallyfunctions as a secondary data repository, as a data management andanalysis tool, and as an information distribution network controller forremote management participation.

To facilitate the transfer of data between the two databases, eachdatabase system connects to either a local area network (LAN) and/orwide area network (WAN). Alternatively, the two database systems maycommunicate with one another by means of a direct connection, such as,for example, a dedicated fiber optic line.

Every academic class or instructional course is divided into a number ofinstruction and evaluation periods. For purposes of this discussion, itwill be assumed that management has settled upon periods equivalent to astandard school week.

At the beginning of every week, the instructor accesses the lessonplanning portion of the classroom guidance computer and selects one ormore learning units as objectives from the management establisheddatabase. The instructor then initiates a weekly lesson plan on theclassroom guidance computer which incorporates the selected objectivesvia a software format and portrays the information on a screen.Coincidentally, these academic scheduling choices are presented onremote management computers. In an alternative embodiment, the selectionof learning units would not be carried out by the instructor, but wouldbe predetermined by the management software.

The lesson plan of the week is subsequently printed out as a WEEKLYPREVIEW report which is distributed to parents. As illustrated in FIG.4, the WEEKLY PREVIEW report includes, among other things, a listing ofthe various objectives that make up the lesson plan for that week. Inthis manner, parents are incorporated into the management group, and areinformed of the forthcoming instructional sequence prior to its onset.FIG. 4 also illustrates that the WEEKLY PREVIEW report incorporates asection for the instructor to produce communications for the parents.

Once objectives have been determined and announced to the parents, a“state change” termed “teaching has begun”, is automatically entered foreach student for the chosen objectives into the gradebook (a score of“1”).

IV. A Classroom Guidance System Suitable for Accurately Observing andMeasuring Learning of Subject Matter in Digital Format

At the end of the instructional period, (typically a week), theinstructor evaluates each student's performance for each of the period'sobjectives and enters the results into the classroom guidance computer(i.e., no entry if the student needs to continue to work on the specificobjective, or a 2 to indicate that the student has learned thoroughly(mastered) the specific objective. Evaluation results for each studentare automatically distributed to the administration computer system.Here the “2” score for “learning complete” updates the “1” score for“teaching and learning begun”. A WEEKLY EVALUATION REPORT, illustratedin FIG. 5, is then generated for each student and distributed to eachstudent's parents at the end of the week. This element of the managementsoftware design guarantees the continual parent/manager oversight tohelp assure constant examination of the educational process. Similar tothe WEEKLY PREVIEW report, the WEEKLY EVALUATION REPORT lists thespecific objectives that the class covered over the course of the week,along with the learning evaluation (i.e., grades) as well as any newcomments by the instructor.

An alternative embodiment of the system allows the instructor to accessa Classroom Teaching Chart. This establishes a real time recordingsystem for continuous use throughout the instructional week. TheClassroom Teaching Chart provides a visual representation of allstudents in the class and the current state of learning for each chosenobjective for each student. As illustrated in FIG. 6, the ClassroomTeaching Chart is organized into a series of picture panels labeledindividually with each student's name. When the teacher commencesteaching of an objective and begins observation of a student, theteacher “clicks” upon the appropriate picture panel. This action causesa cartoon-face representation of the student to appear in the picturepanel. The facial demeanor of the cartoon representation is neutral. Ascore of 1 is now entered in the grade registry indicating a state of“teaching and learning has begun”. Later, when the instructor evaluatesa student's learning progress on the objective, and a studentdemonstrates mastery, a further click on the student's picture panelcauses a change of the cartoon face from one color to another (forexample yellow to green) and a change in the facial demeanor fromneutral to broadly smiling. Alternatively, should the instructor'sjudgment be a revision from a previous estimate of mastery to anevaluation of in progress, a “click” will reverse the facial expressionsand color to their previous state.

At the top of the Classroom Teaching Chart is an additional panel whichpresents a continuously adjusted, cumulative total mastery score for theentire class of students.

The instructor may move from one objective to another at differentperiods in the day by simply clicking on the objective navigation bar(either forward or backward) near the top of the chart. When theinstructor chooses to employ this portion of the system, performanceevaluations are continuously updated. Since evaluations are alwayscurrently accurate, no separate “end of week” grading procedure isnecessary.

By use of the Classroom Teaching Chart the instructor knows immediately,and always, the current learning status of each student, and of theentire class for the objective of current classroom interest. Thecapability of this alternative embodiment for establishing an immediaterelation between a learned response and further consequences, byautomatic means, fulfills a necessary condition for learning and therebyprovides a powerful supplemental tool for the instructor. By employmentof a recording system in “real time” the system can be utilized toautomatically produce a variety of alternate nonverbal forms ofrecognition and reward of student learning performance. For example, theoccasion of an instructor recording learning mastery can producefeedback to individual students by novel signals, direct private orpublic delivery of rewards, or the automatic recording of earned rewardsin a computer assisted “bank account”.

At appropriate intervals throughout the academic year, the gradebooksystem also generates and distributes to the parents a QUARTERLYPROGRESS REPORT for each student. FIG. 7, illustrates a sample of theQUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT, which lists the entire year's objectives andthe learning evaluation for each specific objective covered to date.

When a student is evaluated on an objective two or more timessequentially over the course of the year, the latter evaluation or gradedoes not erase the record of previous scores. Instead, all grades arerecorded and saved in their appropriate temporal position of the ongoingrecord. If, during the first quarter, a student is being taught anobjective and is scored a 1, then this grade will carry through for theentire year unless and until the student is re-evaluated at a laterpoint in time. If, for example, the student is re-evaluated during thesecond quarter on the same objective and now demonstrates learningmastery, a score of 2 is recorded. This second grade now remains for therest of the year unless the student is again later evaluated and earns alesser grade.

V. A System for Automatically Analyzing and then Frequently Presentingto Remotely Located Managers, a Complete Description of the Progress andCurrent Achievement Levels of Individual Students, Classrooms, andSchools

On Friday, the week's data for all classrooms is entered into thegradebook section of the classroom guidance computers and a servercollectively transmits the week's data to the remote administrationcomputer system. There, all the teaching and learning information foreach student is assembled into a series of information formats (graphs),which are then transmitted to selected, remote management observationstations. There, various navigation “tools” are provided to the viewerto sort, filter and display the data according to various reviewpriorities. This entire compiled, illustrated, and navigable educationaldatabase is titled THE LEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT. A cardinal feature ofTHE LEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT is its bidirectional organizationallowing viewer examination from the specific to the general or viceversa. Review can begin with an individual student in a selectedcurriculum, forward to progressively more generalized reports such asthe overall performance of entire classrooms for all curricula.Alternatively, the viewer may start from the general analysis and movetoward subsidiary information. This is accomplished by a ring of reportsaddressable in either direction, starting from an introductory panel.The information presentation sequence of the present invention isillustrated in FIG. 8.

Additional graphic presentations for entire multiple classroom grades,entire school buildings, etc. or alternatively, individual studentspecial instruction routines, are inserted, either as subroutines, ordirectly within the main navigation ring at the appropriate position inthe sequence. Graphic presentation may be by direct screen viewing andautomatic network distribution or by printer production and physicaldistribution. Navigation across and within data subsets is arranged byincorporating a “point and click” rubric, using the computer keyboardand/or mouse. The viewer chooses data presentation by moving the mousepointer to a specific option target as selected from a multileveldata-command target bar. Navigational options are large, highvisibility, target spaces highlighted by arrow shaped (< >) movementsignals. The user points the mouse to such a target and “clicks” thecommand button for data set advance or retreat. By using the scrollingfeature of the mouse, the viewer can extend examination through lengthyobjective sequences which are more extensive than presentable inentirety on a single screen. By this system it is possible to rapidlyscan and study entire learning repertoires for either individualstudents or entire classrooms, etc.

Considering the graphic series of reports from specific to general, thefirst presentation panel of the LEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT, an exampleof which is shown in FIG. 9, is the report introduction cover. Thispanel is useful for background information, advisories of currentissues, etc. and log in security clearances. It also serves to positionthe viewer to begin an examination from the general or from the specificpoint of reference. The viewer begins the inquiry by “clicking” themouse on the target of interest and proceeding.

If the viewer chooses to begin with specific detail, the first reportshown is the STUDENT LOG. The illustrated example in FIG. 10 depicts asection of the STUDENT LOG for one student that provides a compendium ofthe actual teacher instructional sequences and evaluation scores foreach objective for each week, organized by curriculum groups, for allweeks of the academic year. The weekly succession of learning scores astudent receives for each specific objective is presented across thecourse of the year. The most recent score received is also “broughtforward” in an initial left hand column titled “LAST” for viewerconvenience. Four additional columns (E1, E2, E3, E4) inserted into theweekly sequence afford space for evaluations from teacher-independentsources for any or all, objectives, if and when these are available.Evaluation scores of 1 or “teaching and learning incomplete” areaccented in red to attract viewer attention. A double row space, abovethe weekly column of the screen is provided for noting supplementaryinformation or individual special tutorial actions.

The voluminous material of a student log is available in summary asillustrated in the example of FIG. 11. The summary is termed the STUDENTDIGEST and presents, weekly, for each student, a cumulative bar graphcumulating the student's progressive, level of learning, for eachcurricular area (i.e., math, science, reading, etc.), up to the currentweek of the academic year. If an instructor were to evenly introduce theobjectives of a specific curricular area over the course of the academicyear, and the student consistently mastered these objectives as theywere presented, the corresponding graph would rise in a progressive,roughly linear ascent starting from 0% at the beginning of the year andrising to 100% at the end of the year. The rate of teaching (objectiveintroduction) coupled with the efficiency of student learning (grade)together produces the total learning, and variations in either teachingor student efficiency (grade) therefore affect the learning measurepresented.

For example, a graph depicting a 90% learning level halfway through theyear (week 20), would indicate that the instructor introduced a majorityof the objectives for a specific curricular area in the first half ofthe year, and the student mastered those objectives. In contrast, agraph depicting a 25% learning level halfway through the year couldindicate one of several things; the instructor had not yet introducedmany of the objectives for a specific curricular area, or, theinstructor had introduced the objectives but the student had not yetmastered the material.

The STUDENT DIGEST depicts the general educational accomplishment todate for each student, for each entire individual curricular area, and,additionally, a more general overview of performance for the entirecurriculum. In each of the STUDENT DIGEST graphs, the angular guidelineprovides the viewer a benchmark representing the progressive learningmastery of all objectives taught to date. Additionally, the actualnumerical value for the three cardinal elements known by this invention;teaching (“TEACH”), cumulative learning (“LEARN”) and the derivedestimate of a student's learning efficiency (“GRADE”), are provided foreach curriculum grouping.

The material presented by the STUDENT DIGEST is further available assummarized, and can be referenced by the STUDENT/CLASS PERFORMANCERANGES table.

One example of this more general performance analysis is shown in FIG.12. Here, the two components of current learning performance, totallearning & learning efficiency or grade, are shown for each student in aparticular classroom for each curriculum area. This graphic presentationis formatted to initially present the data hierarchically according toeach student's overall average grade. An independent navigation targetallows the selection of alternate criterion for ranking learningperformances, either by “grade” or by “learn” scores according to thevarious individual curricular areas. Performances with an average gradebelow 75% are accented in red to attract viewer attention. This screenallows the summary examination of each individual student's totalperformance in each curricular area as well as the student's learningefficiencies (grades) referenced to other classmates.

The information contained in the three individual student performancegraphs can be summarized for an entire classroom. A running log ofentire classroom activity (FIG. 13) is provided by the CLASSROOM LOG.This summary presents, for all students as a group, the average totallearning score for each objective, for each week, organized bycurricular groups, for all weeks of the academic year. In analogousfashion to the STUDENT LOG described earlier, the CLASSROOM LOG presentsthe actual, average numerical accomplishment for the entire classroomgroup in full detail across the academic year. Presented scores aremultiplied by 10 to eliminate decimals. Here, just as with the STUDENTLOG, average group scores below 75% mastery are highlighted in red toprompt viewer attention. Just as with the STUDENT LOG, there are columns(E1, E2, E3, E4) interspersed in 4 places within the year for recordingteacher-independent information regarding performance. One feature ofthis graphic presentation is the direct portrayal of relative difficultyof different objectives for the entire class of students.

The broadest overview of general classroom performance is the CLASSROOMDIGEST. FIG. 14 illustrates an example of the CLASSROOM DIGEST whichpresents, for the entire classroom, a series of cumulative bar graphsindicating summary learning progress for each curricular area of studyup to the current week. Here, as with the STUDENT DIGEST, data issummarized across entire curricula and accumulated across the weeks ofthe school year to portray major trends in progress of accomplished(mastery) learning. In addition to the bar graphs, entire class learningperformance can also be presented in numerical terms, wherein, forexample, the total progress to date of learning (“LEARN”) is divided bythe total teaching to date associated with these learning results(“TEACH”) to yield the overall efficiency of learning (“GRADE”). Here aswell, a solid guideline from zero to 100% learning allows the viewer torapidly scan the performance of the entire class for progress throughoutthe year as it may lag or lead this standard.

Users of the LEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT are provided with the ability torapidly move between individual student reports and group reports, aswell as across individual students, groups, grades and curricular areas.Such facility to rapidly move between different reports which are veryfrequently generated, establishes for the viewer the opportunity to spottrends, individual variations, curricular difficulties and teachingpatterns. Such analysis allows for the early detection of potentialproblems and/or opportunities that would otherwise not be seen byconventional long-intermittent academic planning and grading systems. Incontrast, THE LEARNING MANAGEMENT REPORT is always current, beingupdated at virtually the same rapid pace as the educational dynamics ofthe classroom.

1. A computer-implemented method of overseeing and adjusting andstrengthening the instruction and evaluation of a student with respectto one or more topics of study within a classroom, comprising the stepsof: analyzing a subject matter of an academic course of study in detailand subsequently breaking down the totality of knowledge of the subjectmatter that the student is expected to learn into a plurality ofdiscretely defined behavioral performances that are designed to bereadily and objectively recognized as being mastered or not by thestudent; storing the plurality of discretely defined behavioralperformances into at least a first computerized database system whichorganizes the plurality of discretely defined behavioral performances onthe basis of structural and functional groupings as well as conventionallevels of difficulty or advancement; for each specified evaluationperiod of the classroom, designating one or more of the discretelydefined behavioral performances stored in the first computerizeddatabase as learning objectives that are to be studied by the student;evaluating an ability of the student to carry out the one or morediscretely defined behavioral performances designated as learningobjectives over the course of the evaluation period and recording theresults of the evaluation in real time into the first computerizeddatabase system; generating a dynamic classroom teaching chart providinga real time visual representation of the student's learning progress forone or more learning objectives for the specified evaluation period; atthe end of each specified evaluation period, automatically transferringthe recorded results of the evaluation to a second computerized databasesystem that collects evaluation results for each student, for everyevaluation period, for every class, and organizes the plurality ofcollected evaluation results into an interactive learning managementreport that can be configured by a reviewer in real time to display avariety of levels of detail ranging from a specific level, such as aspecific subject matter for a specific student, to a general level ofdetail, such as the overall performance of a classroom or school over aspecified period of time.
 2. The method according to claim 1, furthercomprising the step of strengthening a learning performance of thestudent by automatically presenting, directly to the student during anevaluation period, at least one of a non verbal recognition and otherreward for learning progress.
 3. The method according to claim 1,wherein the dynamic classroom teaching chart provides a real time visualrepresentation of the learning progress for each student and for theentire class.
 4. The method according to claim 1, wherein the dynamicclassroom teaching chart displays a real time, continuously adjusted,cumulative total mastery score for an entire class of students for oneor more selected learning objectives.
 5. The method according to claim1, wherein continual parent or guardian oversight of a student'slearning and performance is maintained by the additional steps of:generating a preview report at the beginning of each specifiedevaluation period and distributing the preview report to at least oneparent or guardian of each student, said preview report listing each ofthe learning objectives for the specified evaluation period; andgenerating an evaluation report at the end of each specified evaluationperiod and distributing the evaluation report to at least one parent orguardian of each student, said evaluation report listing each of thelearning objectives for the specified evaluation period along with theassociated evaluation results of the student's performance for thespecified evaluation period.
 6. The method according to claim 5, whereinat least one of the preview report and evaluation report furtherincludes a comments section for remarks made by an instructor anddirected to the parent or guardian.
 7. The method according to claim 1,wherein a student earns a score of zero, one or two upon being evaluatedwith respect to any one learning objective.
 8. The method according toclaim 7, wherein: a score of zero represents that instruction of thatspecific learning objective has not yet begun; a score of one representsthat instruction of that specific learning objective has begun but thatlearning is not yet complete; and a score of two represents thatinstruction and learning of that specific learning objective iscomplete.
 9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the firstcomputerized database system resides within a computer that is locallymanaged with respect to the classroom, while the second computerizeddatabase system resides within a remote computer associated with aschool district office or other school administrative body.
 10. Themethod according to claim 9, wherein the remote computer generallyfunctions as one of a secondary data repository, a data management andanalysis tool, and an information distribution network controller forremote management participation.
 11. The method according to claim 9,wherein the locally managed computer and the remote computer connect toat least one of a local area network (LAN) and wide area network (WAN),or alternatively, connect to each other by means of a direct connection.12. The method according to claim 1, wherein an instructor selects oneor more of the discretely defined behavioral performances fordesignation as a learning objective.
 13. The method according to claim1, wherein the first computerized database selects one or more of thediscretely defined behavioral performances for designation as a learningobjective on the basis of at least one predetermined criteria.
 14. Themethod according to claim 1, further comprising the step of generating aquarterly progress report for each student at appropriate intervalsthroughout an academic year, the quarterly progress report listing allselected learning objectives for the academic year, as well as theevaluation results for that student for each specific learning objectivecovered to date.
 15. The method according to claim 1, wherein if astudent is evaluated on a learning objective two or more times over thecourse of an academic year, the latter evaluation result is recorded atthe appropriate temporal position within a student's ongoing record anddoes not erase any previous evaluation results.
 16. The method accordingto claim 1, wherein the step of organizing the plurality of collectedevaluation results into a learning management report further comprisesthe step of generating a student log that provides a compendium ofinstructional objectives introduced to date, along with the associatedevaluation results of a student for each learning objective for eachspecified evaluation period, organized by curriculum groups, for anentire academic year.
 17. The method according to claim 1, wherein thestep of organizing the plurality of collected evaluation results into alearning management report further comprises the step of generating astudent digest that presents, for each student, a cumulative bar graphdepicting a student's progressive level of learning for each curriculararea of study.
 18. The method according to claim 1, wherein the step oforganizing the plurality of collected evaluation results into a learningmanagement report further comprises the step of generating astudent/class performance ranges table that depicts, for each studentwithin a specified class, the percentage of learning objectives learnedto date for each specific curriculum group, as well as the student'slearning efficiency for that curriculum group, and a student's overallevaluation results, represented as a percentage, for all curriculumgroups.
 19. The method according to claim 1, wherein the step oforganizing the plurality of collected evaluation results into a learningmanagement report further comprises the step of generating a classroomlog that depicts an average total score for the evaluation results of aclass as a whole, for each evaluation period, for each learningobjective.
 20. The method according to claim 1, wherein the step oforganizing the plurality of collected evaluation results into a learningmanagement report further comprises the step of generating a classroomdigest that presents, for an entire classroom, a cumulative bar graphdepicting the classroom's progressive level of learning for eachcurricular area of study.